Tuesday, May 23, 2006

LibertyScott raises valid points though. What's our problem with peopleliving wherever they want and how they want. If these guys had their way,the roads to those suburbs would be privately funded, through privateland. The people who lived there and built the roads would be the onlyones who fell over when the oil price goes through the roof.To which I replied,

I don't think it's a valid point at all. Who decides that I can't build myself a bach with a view across Mt Aspiring. And whats the difference between the "good" that is a national park and the "good" that is productive farmland. Which is better?

Someone has to make decisions about where we live and what use land is put to. Most libertarian arguments quickly descend into absurdity with little more than a cursory look. Libertarians very rarely understand that their arguments wholly depend on the same normative bullshit that (for eg.) socialist arguments are based on. The decision about who says what goes and what doesn't. By arguing there is no place for me to make such judgements they are infact contradicting themselves.

There is no more foundational basis for the argument that I ought not make a value judgement about some behaviour or desire than I do.